Hi John,

There is someone that is asking about the resurrection, and asking for evidence that it actually happened, and why we should be giving credit to God. I wanted to ask you if you had any good points that I could share with them, I would really like to help answer their questions!

Hi and thanks for the question.

Apologists (like William Lane Craig) have centered their case around 3 well-accepted facts of history (at least, most scholars hold to these as being more plausibly true than their negation). These facts are: 1) Christ’s tomb was found empty by a group of His women followers on the Sunday following His crucifixion. 2) Christ’s original disciples sincerely believed that they had encountered Jesus back from the dead. 3) Christianity, with its emphasis on the risen Messiah, and our own future resurrection as His followers, suddenly sprang onto the scene.

Craig and others then direct our attention to the methodological principle of “inference to the best explanation.” In other words, which hypothesis best explains these 3 facts? Craig et al would point out that based on the ordinary rules of history, the best explanation is the hypothesis that: 1) shows superior power to convincingly explain the accepted facts, 2) shows superior explanatory scope (that is, does the hypothesis sufficiently explain ALL the facts before us), 3) plausibility, 4) is less ad hoc than rival hypotheses (that is, less “just so” stories; made up details invented in order to salvage an implausible explanation), 5) is disconfirmed by fewer widely accepted beliefs, 6) outstrips rival hypotheses in points 1-6.  Craig et al shows that the hypothesis that God raised Jesus from the dead is by far the best explanation.

Evidential apologists (like Gary Habermas and Josh McDowell) focus their arguments on the historic data, trusting that most of us can “put two-and-two together” and reach a reasonable conclusion as to what actually happened. Habermas points out that even atheists grant that Paul the apostle wrote Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians and Galatians. It is also agreed that 1 Corinthians was penned around AD 55.  Focus is then placed upon 1 Corinthians 15:3-7. Here Paul clearly lays out the account of Christ dying for our sins, rising again and being seen by various witnesses whom he names. Several things are then pointed out.

First, Paul states clearly that the material that he is sharing with them in his letter (vv 3-8) is the same material that he shared with them the first time he came to Corinth which most believe was somewhere around AD 51. He also makes it clear that this material was not something that he dreamed up, but was received by himself sometime before his visit to Corinth. So we now know that the account of Christ’s resurrection goes back to within 20 years of the crucifixion (not 50 or more years as some critics claim).

Secondly, form critics have reached the conclusion that the material that Paul shares in 1 Corinthians 15:3-7 is in creedal form. That is, what Paul received prior to his first visit to Corinth was already established well-enough that it had been synopsised into a formal statement of belief. Formalization of this type takes time. What we say then with certainty is that the first preaching of Christ’s resurrection from the dead was not invented by Paul 40+ years after the crucifixion, but must’ve occurred very soon after.

Thirdly – and very importantly – Paul mentions two people that supposedly saw Jesus alive from the dead: Peter and James. In Galatians chapters one and two (also acknowledged as authentically Paul’s), Paul says that after his conversion he went to Jerusalem on two occasions and visited with both of these men. Paul states that he shared with them the Gospel that he was preaching and he found that the apostles – including Peter and James – were in complete agreement with it. In other words, both Peter and James (and John, see Galatians 2) agreed that they had seen the risen Christ.

Galatians 1 & 2 is explicit that Paul did not invent Christianity but embraced a faith system that was already firmly established, complete with the doctrine of Christ’s resurrection at its center.
Much more can be said, but to summarize what I have shared here I leave you with the following points.

1. The hypothesis that God raised Jesus from the dead is the best explanation for Christ’s empty tomb, the post resurrection appearances, and the origin of the disciples’ faith.
2. The resurrection of Jesus was being claimed by His original followers, in Jerusalem, very soon after the crucifixion – certainly within 3 or so years (probably earlier). This is not enough time for all sorts of legendary material to creep in and obliterate core historical facts.

I hope this material is helpful to you. God bless!